I know that every so often there are mod/admin meetings. I know that people all across the .org are chomping at the bit to get some more information about what the administrators are doing to help the website and the community.

Why doesn't the meeting take place in a slightly more public venue, like an IRC room that users can sit in on? Much like a court room or many governmental discussions we, if we are interested enough, can sit in on the meeting and find out exactly what is going on. If nothing is going on, or what is going on is incredibly boring, we find that out as well.

The only argument I can see against it is "what about trolls?" Well that's an easy fix. The audience watching the proceedings do not need to talk, nor should they, so you just make the room moderated (+m) so only people with voice can speak.

I think having a public forum for the administrators to discuss site matters that is open and accessible to the general public would do alot to inform the users about what's going on, and lessen the frustration that some of us are feeling at not being able to see anything get done.

I know that every so often there are mod/admin meetings. I know that people all across the .org are chomping at the bit to get some more information about what the administrators are doing to help the website and the community.

Why doesn't the meeting take place in a slightly more public venue, like an IRC room that users can sit in on? Much like a court room or many governmental discussions we, if we are interested enough, can sit in on the meeting and find out exactly what is going on. If nothing is going on, or what is going on is incredibly boring, we find that out as well.

The only argument I can see against it is "what about trolls?" Well that's an easy fix. The audience watching the proceedings do not need to talk, nor should they, so you just make the room moderated (+m) so only people with voice can speak.

I think having a public forum for the administrators to discuss site matters that is open and accessible to the general public would do alot to inform the users about what's going on, and lessen the frustration that some of us are feeling at not being able to see anything get done.

I know that every so often there are mod/admin meetings. I know that people all across the .org are chomping at the bit to get some more information about what the administrators are doing to help the website and the community.

Why doesn't the meeting take place in a slightly more public venue, like an IRC room that users can sit in on? Much like a court room or many governmental discussions we, if we are interested enough, can sit in on the meeting and find out exactly what is going on. If nothing is going on, or what is going on is incredibly boring, we find that out as well.

The only argument I can see against it is "what about trolls?" Well that's an easy fix. The audience watching the proceedings do not need to talk, nor should they, so you just make the room moderated (+m) so only people with voice can speak.

I think having a public forum for the administrators to discuss site matters that is open and accessible to the general public would do alot to inform the users about what's going on, and lessen the frustration that some of us are feeling at not being able to see anything get done.

This. So much this.

Yeah, less about a "democracy" and just more about some transparency.

I'd be all for sitting in on some meetings, even if during them I don't have a voice. I can't see ANY reasons why you'd want to keep things (on this particular subject, at least) behind closed doors.

Well technically, there is a public place to talk about the redesign 24/7. It's called #grommet on IRC, you guys should hang out there more.

I think a "town hall" meeting is an excellent idea. The general meetings is something that's hard to have in public though. While about 70% of what's talked about is absolutely okay and would be beneficial to be observed publicly, there's still some stuff discussed in admin meetings (legal and site ownership issues, security issues, directives from the freemasons and illumanati) that needs to remain private. Given how difficult it can be to get all of the mods/admins together, it's just better to hold this stuff privately when the opportunity presents itself.

BUT I'm all in favour of scheduling a public meeting if others like the idea.

Recently I’ve been haunting myself. The shocking thing is how easy it is to disappear if you really want to. I wonder for the millionth time how long it will be before anyone misses me.-SW/HCE

Otohiko wrote:. While about 70% of what's talked about is absolutely okay and would be beneficial to be observed publicly, there's still some stuff discussed in admin meetings (legal and site ownership issues, security issues, directives from the freemasons and illumanati) that needs to remain private.

The fuck?

Last I checked, the Org was not a sovereign nation that had matters of national security. Do we have some kind of intelligence agency that spies on AMVNews.RU or something? Is Otohiko going to show up dead in a gutter if identities are revealed?

Sukunai, Real Canadian Hero wrote:Note to any Muslims present. Abuse a female in my presence, and you are being sent to a hospital emergency ward with life threatening injuries. And no human law will make me change my mind.

By security issues I actually meant things involving access to admin tools, site code, and other under-the-hood stuff. If you don't want your site hacked, it's probably a good idea to not discuss these things in public.

Recently I’ve been haunting myself. The shocking thing is how easy it is to disappear if you really want to. I wonder for the millionth time how long it will be before anyone misses me.-SW/HCE

Otohiko wrote:By security issues I actually meant things involving access to admin tools, site code, and other under-the-hood stuff. If you don't want your site hacked, it's probably a good idea to not discuss these things in public.

When was the last time admin tools/site code was discussed in such detail as hackers could use this information? Are you explicitly typing out steps for breaking into the web site?

Could you not just say "hey guys we have found a few code issues that have to be addressed, I'll PM you the details later."?At least that way we could still see what exactly was going on.

Otohiko wrote:By security issues I actually meant things involving access to admin tools, site code, and other under-the-hood stuff. If you don't want your site hacked, it's probably a good idea to not discuss these things in public.

Well... If things are as hard-coded and impossibly difficult to change and tinker with for people that have access to it on a regular basis I dunno how much you need to worry about hackers making things more inconvienent.

On a serious note though, it'd be nice to have the town hall style discussion where topics that can be made public are public.

Otohiko wrote:Well technically, there is a public place to talk about the redesign 24/7. It's called #grommet on IRC, you guys should hang out there more.

I think a "town hall" meeting is an excellent idea. The general meetings is something that's hard to have in public though. While about 70% of what's talked about is absolutely okay and would be beneficial to be observed publicly, there's still some stuff discussed in admin meetings (legal and site ownership issues, security issues, directives from the freemasons and illumanati) that needs to remain private. Given how difficult it can be to get all of the mods/admins together, it's just better to hold this stuff privately when the opportunity presents itself.

BUT I'm all in favour of scheduling a public meeting if others like the idea.

Just have the first half of the meeting private (in #seekretadminchannel) and handle the private side of things, then hop into a public but moderated channel for the rest of it. If you wanted to allow some public Q&A, designate someone to PM questions to and have that person bounce (some of) the questions off the rest of the staff.

It's interesting to see what you have to say on the redesign. I suppose I was one of those left in the dark because I thought nothing was happening.

Then to go to the thread and check it out and see a lot of "why are you doing this?" only to be responded with "if you don't like it code it yourself" -_- Also I guess I'd been out of the loop for so long I didn't even know who this "i fight for the users" was.. good to have that cleared up as well.

Still, I'd like to give some input but I feel like it's just going to be shot down in the end.

Then to go to the thread and check it out and see a lot of "why are you doing this?" only to be responded with "if you don't like it code it yourself" -_- Also I guess I'd been out of the loop for so long I didn't even know who this "i fight for the users" was.. good to have that cleared up as well.

There's a lot more in that thread than me telling Sanya-nya and Bashar

.

There are some things that I am indeed unwilling to compromise on. In those cases it is indeed a case of

Many other things, though, are open for discussion, and evoke more of a

I'm not one to take sides, but I must admit, IFFTU has made a very open dialog with me regarding the opinion system in the Issues part of the website. It's not EXACTLY what I wanted, but the compromise (assuming it goes into production) is more than i could have hoped for, and I think I like the alternative better than what I originally suggested.